The REDTORY . Post-Industrial District in Guangzhou, China
SyllabusLSA422_150831.pdf | |
File Size: | 385 kb |
File Type: |
5
LSA 422 landscape architectural design studio III
Fall 2015 course syllabus
"The landscapes that are ultimately created are essentially new to the earth. Cities, for example, are often built of materials that are thermally and hydrologically extreme to the land, and in structural forms that are geomorphically atypical in most landscapes. It is a landscape distinctly different from the landscapes it displaced and, in many respects, decidedly inferior as a human habitat. The modern metropolitan environment that results tends to be less healthy, less safe, and emotionally secure than most people desire. Moreover, the very existence of such environments poses a serious uncertainty to future generations owing to the high cost of maintaining both the environment and the quality of human life within them. In addition, their relationship with the natural environment of water, air, soil, and ecological systems is a lopsided one that does not adequately fit our notion of a sustainable balance between an organism and its habitat. Herein lies much of the basis for land use planning, landscape design, and urban and regional planning"
William Marsh, Landscape Planning Environmental Applications, page 8
Instructor of Record: Assistant Professor Isabel C. Fernández
Office location: 334 Marshall Hall
Office hours: Mondays & Wednesdays 11 - 12:00 or by appointment
Phone: 303.525.8563 or at the office at 315.470.4918 (do not leave voicemails)
Email: [email protected]
Visiting Lecturer: Jocelyn Gavitt
Office location: 322 Marshall Hall
Office hours: Wednesdays 12:45-1:45 or by appointment
Email: [email protected]
Graduate Assistant: Jiayi Hu
Email: [email protected]
CLASS MEETING TIMES
Mondays 1:50 pm - 5:15 pm
Wednesdays 2:00 pm - 5:15 pm
Fridays 1:50 pm - 5:15 pm
Faculty will be present at 2:00 pm M,F and 2:10 Wednesdays – all the work due that day shall be ready to be reviewed/pinned up, and discuss by then.
Break time as per the course official schedule will be held between 2:45 pm and 2:55 pm (during break time try to go outside when possible)
source: http://www.esf.edu/registrar/schedfall.asp#LSA
Studio work days will be assigned in the project brief's. During these days your course instructors are available but will not physically be in the studio.
CLASS MEETING LOCATION
Marshal Hall 316 unless otherwise specified by your course instructors or GA
COURSE DESCRIPTION
Seven (7) hours of studio and one (1) hour of lecture/demonstration per week, plus substantial outside preparation by the student. This course introduces and applies concepts of urban and regional planning, environmental planning, and landscape ecology, in the context of large-scale landscape architectural, community, and urban design. Emphasis will be placed upon the application of appropriate technologies and strategies to foster environmentally and economically sustainable community forms, as well as greater environmental and social equity. Occasional field trips to illustrate various design solutions. (Student field trip and materials expenses $300-$400) Fall / Prerequisites: LSA 327 with a minimum grade of "C" or better, or permission of instructor.
source: http://www.esf.edu/la/courses.asp | Last revised: Friday, February 06, 2004
STUDIO OVERVIEW
The present condition and trajectory of our built environment, our health and that of our ecosystems affords the study of a myriad of complex problems across a diversity of scales. To learn how to address these adequately this course involves a semester-long applied project, a real site and a real client group. Other activities will be introduced strategically along the semester to strengthen and deepen your knowledge and understanding of the complex issues this project presents, improve the class discourse, instigate critical thinking and promote hands (first hand learning) on learning.
The site's industrial past and proximity to the urban center of the City of Ithaca, Ithaca College, Cornell University, residential neighborhoods, and nature; provides a canvas for inspiring transformational ideas grounded on context. Its size and programmatic requirements allow for the exploration of issues that expand from the macro to the micro scales and their interconnectedness. The studio format shall serve as a forum to create innovative solutions that holistically engage and balance the unique economic, environmental, socio-cultural, and aesthetic conditions of the place.
Students will work in teams, not unlike in a professional office setting, and at times individually, to research and prepare synthesized site analysis, case studies and precedents, branding and identity concepts, architectural and site design at the macro, meso and micro scales. This project will also allow you to attain an understanding of the financial implications of your design proposals. A series of reviews with your faculty and jurors are scheduled to actively provide necessary feedback to improve your products. The project will culminate in the form of a comprehensive written and design report, and a visual and oral presentation, by which each team will make recommendations for a development project to an actual owner/client and a selected jury of professionals.
LEARNING OUTCOMES
Upon the successful completion of this course students should know how to:
[1] create technically competent, aesthetically pleasing, economically sustainable, culturally and environmentally sensitive and innovative design solutions at multiple scales: from the larger planning vision to the more intricate design stages of form giving, space and place generation.
[2] demonstrate effective teamwork strategies and a grasp of the critical process of client participation and engagement, and multi-disciplinary collaboration.
[3] synthesize quantitative and qualitative data and utilize it to drive a project’s design direction
[4] generate a well crafted project dilemma, vision, goals and objectives
[5] demonstrate the ability to proficiently move back and forth between well crafted computer generated products, hand graphics and physical models as design solutions are explored and refined.
[6] demonstrate an understanding of scale and how it affects space and people
[7] communicate and deliver strong verbal and graphic presentations to a diversity of audiences
[8] articulate proficiently knowledge of the theory and real world impacts of development, architectural form, massing, density, programming diversity and function, landscape as framework, technology and the interrelationship of environmental, economic, community and aesthetic functions.
COLLEGE WIDE LEARNING OUTCOMES ADDRESSED BY THIS COURSE:
Students will be able to:
1. effectively describe, interpret, apply, and evaluate quantitative and qualitative information.
2. formulate and present ideas that reflect critical thinking skills and show awareness of audience, context, and purpose, and present a well-developed argument
3. use critical thinking skills to determine the information needed to solve a problem, access information using appropriate technologies, and effectively and appropriately use information to accomplish a specific purpose.
4. demonstrate awareness of diverse cultures and values, recognize ethical issues in contemporary society, and apply ethical concepts in addressing diverse personal, professional, and societal settings.
5. identify, analyze, evaluate, and develop well-reasoned arguments”.
source: www.esf.edu/facgov/iqas.htm
PROGRAM WIDE LEARNING OUTCOMES ADDRESSED BY THIS COURSE:
This course is a required course in the department’s studio sequence meeting the program required outcomes of optimally preparing students to critically and creatively solve projects of increase challenge and complexity at a diversity of scales.
Students will be able to:
1. consider, assess, and incorporate a broad range of social, cultural, and behavioral factors into design and planning of the land. This will be illustrated in this course via the following indicators:
2. consider, assess, and incorporate a broad range of natural factors and processes, including climate, ecology, geology, soils, hydrology, and physiography into design and planning of the land.
3. consider, assess, and adapt to a variety of political, legal, and regulatory contexts for design
4. draw upon the precedents and typologies developed over the course of the history of art and design.
5. consider and assess the design context of a particular site, place, or region, and identify important design forms, patterns, and organizing structures.
6. observe, record, and visualize the form and character of 3-dimensional spaces.
7. select, apply, and communicate an appropriate and defensible design process to address and solve a wide range of design and planning problems
COURSE SCHEDULE + IMPORTANT DATES:
Project briefs will be delivered as the course develops containing detail information. Schedule is subject to minor changes that will be announced during class and this website.
o Aug. 31 First day of classes . semester’s Introduction + sign syllabus
o Sept. 2 Ithaca, NY + Chain Works District SITE VISIT
o NO CLASSES: Monday, September 7 - Labor Day
o Wednesday, September 16 REVIEW Brief 1(lecture in LSA 220 by Jonathan Peet – Marshall Hall 316 from 5:30-6:50 attend for extra credit)
o Wednesday, September 23 REVIEW Brief 2
o Thursday, September 24 - Sunday, September 27 BOSTON FIELD TRIP
o Monday, September 28 – Monday, October 12 / WORKSHOP
o Monday,September 28 CAZENOVIA SITE VISIT
o Friday, October 12 WORKSHOP Final REVIEW Brief 3 . in CAZENOVIA, NY . Brief 4 delivery
o Wednesday, October 14 CHAIN WORKS review of IDEAGRAMS
o Friday, Oct. 16 CHAIN WORKS SITE VISIT + Presentation
o Friday, Oct. 30 MID TERM REVIEW Brief 4
o Wednesday, Nov. 18 REVIEW Brief 5
o November 22 - 29 - Thanksgiving Break
o November 6–9, 2015 ASLA Convention CHICAGO @ McCormick Place
o Friday, December 11 Last day of classes & FINAL REVIEW Brief 6 | from: 1:50 pm - 6:00 pm in Ithaca, NY
o Tuesday, December 15 Class Portfolio DUE to: FTP site, weebly and cd’s
*It is a course requirement to complete a final review therefore you must be available and in town. Failure to participate of this final review will result in course failure.
ATTENDANCE POLICY
In order to complete the course work and be able to participate you shall be present at every class. Although attendance will not be used as a grading criterion and attendance records will not be kept, participation and course work will be graded as indicated within the grading section below.
If you encounter a situation beyond your control in which you will be missing 3 or more days of classes, you can contact the Office of Student Life (110 Bray, 315-470-6658) and they will contact all your instructors for you. Supportive documentation may be required.
GRADING
Grades are assigned in all credit bearing courses to reflect how well students have met the student learning outcomes of the course. Details about the grading components:
> 2 cd's in Prof. Fernández mailbox
> complete and linked to this website
* Reviews and briefs will be weighed differently, see brief for details on points out of your final grade
GRADING RUBRIC
Within each brief there will be multiple informal and formal reviews during which you will present your interim and your final products. These presentations are equivalent to quizzes/exams and will be evaluated as per the following rubric:
From 1-5 on each of the categories below (1=fails to meet expectations, 2=partly meets expectations, 3=meets expectations, 4= exceeds expectations, 5=exceptional)
STUDIO GRADE DESCRIPTIONS
Excellent Work: A, A- | 100-90
As a faculty we are enthusiastic about giving A’s for excellent student work; however, we intend these grades to be meaningful. Therefore, with the bar set high there may be few A’s in the class. Students who receive A’s in studio will have earned their grade by:
1. Producing design work that utilizes a strong conceptual foundation, clearly articulates forms derived from that concept, and articulates a cohesive spatial design.
2. Fully and exhaustively researching and developing design proposals, utilizing ideas not touched on directly in class. (For example, researching built or proposed works similar to the assigned problem for inspiration or technical approach; or pursuing readings outside of what has been assigned to broaden your understanding of the problem.)
3. Demonstrating the ability to achieve and excel in the development of studio work by positively responding to faculty criticism, as well as showing the ability to work independently (this means you do not require constant input, supervision and approval before progressing).
4. Fully utilizing the design process, creating iterative trace studies, overlays and alternatives, creating study models, and other means of fully exploring ideas prior to producing final drawings and models.
5. Demonstrating superior craft—beautifully made drawings and models with precise attention to details.
6. Actively participating/ proposing in a critical dialogue in both group and individual discussions about assignments. A leader who helps faculty foster an atmosphere of inquiry about studio problems.
7. Enthusiastic about the assignments and discussions, working to exceed the minimal expectations.
8. Making the most of each and every studio session (i.e. working the entire period, discussing relevant project-related issues with classmates, effectively using desk crits, participating in discussion, etc.)
9. Using both oral and written communication (on boards) to completely articulate the full range of ideas. Spelling and grammar are excellent.
Notable Work: B+, B | 89-80
A grade of B or higher is reserved for students who go beyond minimal competency and begin to demonstrate a willingness to work hard and consistently with some notable success. Working hard is both a time and effort commitment and success is measured by
1. Producing design work that utilizes a reasonable conceptual foundation, clearly articulates forms derived from that concept, and articulates a cohesive spatial design.
2. Demonstrating not only understanding but also achievement in directing the investigations and development of studio work.
3. Researching and developing design proposals, utilizing ideas not touched on directly in class. (For example, researching built or proposed works similar to the assigned problem for inspiration or technical approach; or pursuing readings outside of what has been assigned to broaden your understanding of the problem.)
4. Utilizing the design process to explore design ideas, as demonstrated by trace studies, overlays and alternatives, study models, etc., prior to producing final drawings and models.
5. Demonstrating strong competence in craft.
6. Often participating in group discussions
7. Demonstrating enthusiasm about the assignments and discussions.
8. Attending and working during each studio session.
9. Using both oral and written communication (on boards) to articulate ideas. Spelling and grammar are good.
Competent Work: B-, C+ | 83-78
A student who consistently meets all deadlines and project requirements as well as:
1. Producing design responses that are derived from an effective conceptual foundation, and are based on forms derived from that concept.
2. Showing a basic understanding of issues introduced in studio.
3. Demonstrating a willingness to think critically about studio design problems by asking good questions of faculty and peers. Student may have some difficulties but actively work to address gaps in their understanding.
4. Demonstrating only a core competence in craft.
5. Occasionally contributing to group discussions.
6. Occasionally enthusiastic about the assignments and discussions.
7. Attending and working during each studio session.
8. Meeting required work for each studio session.
9. Using both oral and written communication (on boards) to articulate ideas. Spelling and grammar are acceptable.
Satisfactory (Marginal) Work: C | 77-74
Student work that meets only a minimal level of competence. This is borderline work and should be considered a warning of the potential for problems in upper level studios. It is important to note that satisfactory work must surpass mere completion by exhibiting an acceptable level of competence.
1. All work is complete and turned in on time.
2. Work shows minimal understanding of issues introduced in the assignments.
3. Student has shown some minimal willingness to think critically about studio design problems, although often creating superficial or reflexive responses not related to a concept.
4. Conceptual foundation for work is weakly defined and articulated, with design responses utilizing forms, patterns, and objects that are applied in loosely arranged space(s).
5. Minimal utilization of the design process, showing little design exploration.
6. Craft is problematic, but ideas are readable.
7. Student is an active member of studio culture.
8. Student attends all studios, arriving on time and departing only at the end of the period.
9. Both oral and written communications (on boards) are minimally effective. Spelling and grammar are problematic.
Unsatisfactory Work: C-, D | 73-70 and 69-60
A student who does not demonstrate the minimal competence to advance in the program. Students receiving a C- or lower must petition to advance to the next studio. Student work that receives this grade has the following characteristics:
1. All deadlines are met, however projects are not complete (see policy on late work).
2. Exhibiting difficulty in demonstrating recognition and understanding of the issues presented in the studio problems.
3. Conceptual foundation for work is poorly defined and articulated, with design responses utilizing unrelated forms and patterns as well as randomly applied objects.
4. Poor utilization of the design process, showing no design exploration and solutions that “appear” on the due date.
5. Little or no willingness to think critically about the studio assignments.
6. Little or no evidence of student work maturing over course of semester.
7. Unacceptable level of craft where accuracy and precision are problematic.
8. Missing or leaving studio sessions early without notice.
9. Repeatedly coming to class late.
10. Being a distraction rather than an asset to the working environment of the studio.
11. Oral and written communications are unclear and poorly articulated. Spelling and grammar are abysmal.
Course Failure: F | 59 and less
1. Student work does not meet minimal academic standards for passing the course.
2. Completion and deadlines are not met.
3. No recognition or understanding of the issues and concepts presented in the studio problems.
4. No willingness to think critically about the studio assignments.
5. No evidence of student work maturing over course of semester.
6. Unacceptable level of craft where accuracy and precision are absent.
7. Missing or leaving studio sessions early without notice.
8. Repeatedly coming to class late.
9. Disciplinary problems.
STUDIO ETIQUETTE
1. Punctual attendance and the timely delivery and presentation of all assignment and projects is required and non-negotiable to realize the learning benefits of this course. If dire circumstances prevent you from attending studio, please notify your Graduate Assistant and/or professors immediately. To pass the course, students must complete all parts of the projects, and submit them at the date and time specified on their project statements—regardless of the degree of completion. Work submitted late will not be given full credit. Extensions without penalty may be given to students with written medical excuses, or to students who can document circumstances beyond their control that prevented them from completing the work. In any event, students must advise studio faculty of their problem at the earliest possible moment—definitely prior to the due date.
2. Refrain from any activity that distracts surrounding people are inconsiderate and disrespectful, including texting, emailing, browsing the web or using cellular phones while in class for non-class related purposes.
3. We encourage: student contribution to the overall progress of the group, interactive participation, solid teamwork and constructive criticism.
4. It is necessary that students have a professional and ethic behavior through the entire course. Lectures are a group activity, and so it requires social consideration and respect amongst members of the group, teachers and professors.
5. Interest, effort, diligence and a positive attitude towards the quality of your work
6. By this time you have all been here long enough to know how to treat each other, how to treat the facilities and to maintain a civil code. Be aware of your classmates feelings, do nothing to offend. If you are unsure of what this civil code is, please speak to your studio instructors.
TEXTBOOKS & MATERIALS:
Although there are no formal textbooks required, there will be required and recommended readings assigned that will either be provided digitally or will need to be downloaded or found (via library resources or internet) by the students.
Students are required to purchase or have access to a variety of traditional graphic communication media and tools such as:
STUDIO RECOMMENDED READINGS/RESOURCES:
The Smart Growth Manual by Andres Duany
Redeveloping Industrial Sites by Carol Berens
Urban design health and the therapeutic environment by Moughtin
Urban Design Reader by Carmona & Tisdell
Health & Community Design by Frank Engelke Schmid
Toward Sustainable Communities by Mark Roseland
Sustainable Communities by Hugh Barton
Sustainable Urbanism Urban Design with Nature by Doug Farr
Design with Nature by Ian McHarg
Walkable City by Jeff Speck
Phyto: Principles and Resources for Site Remediation and Landscape Design
by Niall Kirkwood and Kate Kennen
Manufactured Sites: Rethinking the Post-Industrial Landscape
by Niall Kirkwood
The Hidden Dimension by Edward T. Hall
The Death and Life of Great American Cities by Jane Jacobs
Resilience in Urban Ecology and Design: Linking Theory and Practice for Sustainable Cities
Julie Bargmann, “Just Ground: a social infrastructure for urban landscape regeneration,” in Resilience in Urban Ecology and Design: Linking Theory and Practice for Sustainable Cities, ed. Steward Pickett, (New York: Springer, 2013)
Groundwork: Between Landscape and Architecture
Diana Balmori and Joel Saunders, “Urban Outfitters Headquarters,” Groundwork: Between Landscape and Architecture. (New York: Monacelli, 2011), 148-151.
High Line: The Inside Story of New York City’s Park in the Sky
Joshua David and Robert Hammond, High Line: The Inside Story of New York City’s Park in the Sky, (New York: Farrar, Straus and Giroux, 2011), 56, 67, 74, and 170.
Growing Urban Habitats
William Morrish, Susanne Schindler and Katie Swenson, “GreeNOLA.” Growing Urban Habitats, (Richmond:Stout) 2009, 190-193.
Living Systems: Innovative Materials and Technologies for Landscape Architecture
Liat Margolis and Alexander Robinson, “Ground Reconstitution Strategy,” Living Systems: Innovative Materials and Technologies for Landscape Architecture, (Basel:Birkhäuser, 2007), 114-117.
Women in Green: Voices of Sustainable Design
Kira Gould & Lance Hosey, Women in Green: Voices of Sustainable Design, (Bainbridge Island: Ecotone), 2007.
Weathering and Durability in Landscape Architecture: Fundamentals, Practices, and Case Studies
Niall Kirkwood, Weathering and Durability in Landscape Architecture: Fundamentals, Practices, and Case Studies, (New York: Wiley), 2004.
Re:Crafted: Interpretations of Craft In Contemporary Architecture and Interiors
Marc Kristal, “Turtle Creek Waterworks.” Re:Crafted: Interpretations of Craft In Contemporary Architecture and Interiors, (New York: Monacelli, 2010), 132-139.
JOURNALS
Paisea
Jose Manuel Vidal, “Semi-Private Urban Spaces/Brooklyn Navy Yard Visitors Center,” Paisea, September, 2014.
Green Building & Design
Laura M. Browning, “Architect to Watch,” Green Building & Design, November-December, 2011.
Garden Design
Virginia Small, “Julie Bargmann: Regenerating Down and Out Landscapes,” Garden Design, July/August 2009, 74-75.
Topos
Julie Bargmann and David Hill, “Urban Outfitters Headquarters,” Topos, Special Issue: Materials, May 2009, 52-57.
Landscape Architecture
Elizabeth K. Meyer, “Sustaining Beauty: The Performance of Appearance,” Landscape Architecture October 2008, 92-131.
Construction + Demolition Recycling Magazine
Curt Harler, “Urban Outfitters Brownfields Case Study,” Construction + Demolition Recycling Magazine, February 2008, 48-54.
Green Source Magazine
Jenna McKnight, “The Landscape Healer,” Green Source Magazine, October 2007, 35-36.
Landscape Architecture
Susan Hines, “Julie Bargmann Unexpurgated,” Landscape Architecture, October 2007, 132-139.
Garden Design
“ASLA/Garden Design Residential Awards of Honor,” Garden Design, September 2007, 81.
METROPOLIS
Inga Saffron, “A Stitch in Time,” Metropolis, May 2007, 121-135.
The Next American City
Sarah Johnson, “Industrial Strength,” The Next American City, Spring 2007, 44-45.
Lotus
“Contemporary Landscapes: Reclaiming Terrain,” Lotus, Fall 2006, 22-31.
Architect’s Newspaper
Gunnar Hand, “The New Urbanism,” Architect’s Newspaper, June 2006, 8.
Landscape Architecture
Adam Arvidson, “Coming Clean,” Landscape Architecture, October 2005, 96-115.
HI International
“Bio What?” October 2005
Architecture Magazine
“Talking Trash With Julie Bargmann,” October 2004
METROPOLIS
Melissa Milgrom, “Industrial Strength,” Metropolis, May 2003, 108-111.
Architectural Record
James Russell, "Landscape Urbanism: Not a Contradiction,” Architectural Record, August 2001, 66-74.
Garden Design
Alan Reder, "Toxic Avenger,” Garden Design, August 2001, 18-19.
I.D.
Alexandra Lange, "Cleaning Up," The I.D. FORTY: Socially Conscious Design Issue, February 2001, 60-61.
Architecture
Cathy Ho, “Waste Not, Want Not," Architecture, November 2000, 79-81.
METROPOLIS
Paul Makovsky, “Emerging Voices: New Architecture Faces the Future,” Metropolis, April 2000, 74-75.
Landscape Journal
Brenda Brown, ed., “Testing the Waters,” Landscape Journal Special Issue: Eco-Revelatory Design, Spring 1998, 38-41.
Public Art Review
T. Allan Comp, “A Place of Regeneration,” Public Art Review Regarding Land Issue, Spring / Summer 1997, 14-18.
SOFTWARE KNOWLEDGE NECESSARY
Auto CAD, Adobe series, 3d software, weebly for website development
STUDENTS WITH LEARNING AND PHYSICAL DISABILITIES
SUNY-ESF works with the Office of Disability Services (ODS) at Syracuse University, who is responsible for coordinating disability-related accommodations. Students can contact ODS at 804 University Avenue- Room 309, 315-443-4498 to schedule an appointment and discuss their needs and the process for requesting accommodations. Students may also contact the ESF Office of Student Affairs, 110 Bray Hall, 315-470-6660 for assistance with the process. To learn more about ODS, visit http://disabilityservices.syr.edu. Authorized accommodation forms must be in the instructor's possession one week prior to any anticipated accommodation. Since accommodations may require early planning and generally are not provided retroactively, please contact ODS as soon as possible.
ACADEMIC DISHONESTY
Academic dishonesty is a breach of trust between a student, one’s fellow students, or the instructor(s). By registering for courses at ESF you acknowledge your awareness of the ESF Code of Student Conduct (http://www.esf.edu/students/handbook/StudentHB.05.pdf ), in particular academic dishonesty includes but is not limited to plagiarism and cheating, and other forms of academic misconduct. The Academic Integrity Handbook contains further information and guidance (http://www.esf.edu/students/integrity/). Infractions of the academic integrity code may lead to academic penalties as per the ESF Grading Policy (http://www.esf.edu/provost/policies/documents/GradingPolicy.11.12.2013.pdf).
LSA 422 landscape architectural design studio III
Fall 2015 course syllabus
"The landscapes that are ultimately created are essentially new to the earth. Cities, for example, are often built of materials that are thermally and hydrologically extreme to the land, and in structural forms that are geomorphically atypical in most landscapes. It is a landscape distinctly different from the landscapes it displaced and, in many respects, decidedly inferior as a human habitat. The modern metropolitan environment that results tends to be less healthy, less safe, and emotionally secure than most people desire. Moreover, the very existence of such environments poses a serious uncertainty to future generations owing to the high cost of maintaining both the environment and the quality of human life within them. In addition, their relationship with the natural environment of water, air, soil, and ecological systems is a lopsided one that does not adequately fit our notion of a sustainable balance between an organism and its habitat. Herein lies much of the basis for land use planning, landscape design, and urban and regional planning"
William Marsh, Landscape Planning Environmental Applications, page 8
Instructor of Record: Assistant Professor Isabel C. Fernández
Office location: 334 Marshall Hall
Office hours: Mondays & Wednesdays 11 - 12:00 or by appointment
Phone: 303.525.8563 or at the office at 315.470.4918 (do not leave voicemails)
Email: [email protected]
Visiting Lecturer: Jocelyn Gavitt
Office location: 322 Marshall Hall
Office hours: Wednesdays 12:45-1:45 or by appointment
Email: [email protected]
Graduate Assistant: Jiayi Hu
Email: [email protected]
CLASS MEETING TIMES
Mondays 1:50 pm - 5:15 pm
Wednesdays 2:00 pm - 5:15 pm
Fridays 1:50 pm - 5:15 pm
Faculty will be present at 2:00 pm M,F and 2:10 Wednesdays – all the work due that day shall be ready to be reviewed/pinned up, and discuss by then.
Break time as per the course official schedule will be held between 2:45 pm and 2:55 pm (during break time try to go outside when possible)
source: http://www.esf.edu/registrar/schedfall.asp#LSA
Studio work days will be assigned in the project brief's. During these days your course instructors are available but will not physically be in the studio.
CLASS MEETING LOCATION
Marshal Hall 316 unless otherwise specified by your course instructors or GA
COURSE DESCRIPTION
Seven (7) hours of studio and one (1) hour of lecture/demonstration per week, plus substantial outside preparation by the student. This course introduces and applies concepts of urban and regional planning, environmental planning, and landscape ecology, in the context of large-scale landscape architectural, community, and urban design. Emphasis will be placed upon the application of appropriate technologies and strategies to foster environmentally and economically sustainable community forms, as well as greater environmental and social equity. Occasional field trips to illustrate various design solutions. (Student field trip and materials expenses $300-$400) Fall / Prerequisites: LSA 327 with a minimum grade of "C" or better, or permission of instructor.
source: http://www.esf.edu/la/courses.asp | Last revised: Friday, February 06, 2004
STUDIO OVERVIEW
The present condition and trajectory of our built environment, our health and that of our ecosystems affords the study of a myriad of complex problems across a diversity of scales. To learn how to address these adequately this course involves a semester-long applied project, a real site and a real client group. Other activities will be introduced strategically along the semester to strengthen and deepen your knowledge and understanding of the complex issues this project presents, improve the class discourse, instigate critical thinking and promote hands (first hand learning) on learning.
The site's industrial past and proximity to the urban center of the City of Ithaca, Ithaca College, Cornell University, residential neighborhoods, and nature; provides a canvas for inspiring transformational ideas grounded on context. Its size and programmatic requirements allow for the exploration of issues that expand from the macro to the micro scales and their interconnectedness. The studio format shall serve as a forum to create innovative solutions that holistically engage and balance the unique economic, environmental, socio-cultural, and aesthetic conditions of the place.
Students will work in teams, not unlike in a professional office setting, and at times individually, to research and prepare synthesized site analysis, case studies and precedents, branding and identity concepts, architectural and site design at the macro, meso and micro scales. This project will also allow you to attain an understanding of the financial implications of your design proposals. A series of reviews with your faculty and jurors are scheduled to actively provide necessary feedback to improve your products. The project will culminate in the form of a comprehensive written and design report, and a visual and oral presentation, by which each team will make recommendations for a development project to an actual owner/client and a selected jury of professionals.
LEARNING OUTCOMES
Upon the successful completion of this course students should know how to:
[1] create technically competent, aesthetically pleasing, economically sustainable, culturally and environmentally sensitive and innovative design solutions at multiple scales: from the larger planning vision to the more intricate design stages of form giving, space and place generation.
[2] demonstrate effective teamwork strategies and a grasp of the critical process of client participation and engagement, and multi-disciplinary collaboration.
[3] synthesize quantitative and qualitative data and utilize it to drive a project’s design direction
[4] generate a well crafted project dilemma, vision, goals and objectives
[5] demonstrate the ability to proficiently move back and forth between well crafted computer generated products, hand graphics and physical models as design solutions are explored and refined.
[6] demonstrate an understanding of scale and how it affects space and people
[7] communicate and deliver strong verbal and graphic presentations to a diversity of audiences
[8] articulate proficiently knowledge of the theory and real world impacts of development, architectural form, massing, density, programming diversity and function, landscape as framework, technology and the interrelationship of environmental, economic, community and aesthetic functions.
COLLEGE WIDE LEARNING OUTCOMES ADDRESSED BY THIS COURSE:
Students will be able to:
1. effectively describe, interpret, apply, and evaluate quantitative and qualitative information.
2. formulate and present ideas that reflect critical thinking skills and show awareness of audience, context, and purpose, and present a well-developed argument
3. use critical thinking skills to determine the information needed to solve a problem, access information using appropriate technologies, and effectively and appropriately use information to accomplish a specific purpose.
4. demonstrate awareness of diverse cultures and values, recognize ethical issues in contemporary society, and apply ethical concepts in addressing diverse personal, professional, and societal settings.
5. identify, analyze, evaluate, and develop well-reasoned arguments”.
source: www.esf.edu/facgov/iqas.htm
PROGRAM WIDE LEARNING OUTCOMES ADDRESSED BY THIS COURSE:
This course is a required course in the department’s studio sequence meeting the program required outcomes of optimally preparing students to critically and creatively solve projects of increase challenge and complexity at a diversity of scales.
Students will be able to:
1. consider, assess, and incorporate a broad range of social, cultural, and behavioral factors into design and planning of the land. This will be illustrated in this course via the following indicators:
2. consider, assess, and incorporate a broad range of natural factors and processes, including climate, ecology, geology, soils, hydrology, and physiography into design and planning of the land.
3. consider, assess, and adapt to a variety of political, legal, and regulatory contexts for design
4. draw upon the precedents and typologies developed over the course of the history of art and design.
5. consider and assess the design context of a particular site, place, or region, and identify important design forms, patterns, and organizing structures.
6. observe, record, and visualize the form and character of 3-dimensional spaces.
7. select, apply, and communicate an appropriate and defensible design process to address and solve a wide range of design and planning problems
COURSE SCHEDULE + IMPORTANT DATES:
Project briefs will be delivered as the course develops containing detail information. Schedule is subject to minor changes that will be announced during class and this website.
o Aug. 31 First day of classes . semester’s Introduction + sign syllabus
o Sept. 2 Ithaca, NY + Chain Works District SITE VISIT
o NO CLASSES: Monday, September 7 - Labor Day
o Wednesday, September 16 REVIEW Brief 1(lecture in LSA 220 by Jonathan Peet – Marshall Hall 316 from 5:30-6:50 attend for extra credit)
o Wednesday, September 23 REVIEW Brief 2
o Thursday, September 24 - Sunday, September 27 BOSTON FIELD TRIP
o Monday, September 28 – Monday, October 12 / WORKSHOP
o Monday,September 28 CAZENOVIA SITE VISIT
o Friday, October 12 WORKSHOP Final REVIEW Brief 3 . in CAZENOVIA, NY . Brief 4 delivery
o Wednesday, October 14 CHAIN WORKS review of IDEAGRAMS
o Friday, Oct. 16 CHAIN WORKS SITE VISIT + Presentation
o Friday, Oct. 30 MID TERM REVIEW Brief 4
o Wednesday, Nov. 18 REVIEW Brief 5
o November 22 - 29 - Thanksgiving Break
o November 6–9, 2015 ASLA Convention CHICAGO @ McCormick Place
o Friday, December 11 Last day of classes & FINAL REVIEW Brief 6 | from: 1:50 pm - 6:00 pm in Ithaca, NY
o Tuesday, December 15 Class Portfolio DUE to: FTP site, weebly and cd’s
*It is a course requirement to complete a final review therefore you must be available and in town. Failure to participate of this final review will result in course failure.
ATTENDANCE POLICY
In order to complete the course work and be able to participate you shall be present at every class. Although attendance will not be used as a grading criterion and attendance records will not be kept, participation and course work will be graded as indicated within the grading section below.
If you encounter a situation beyond your control in which you will be missing 3 or more days of classes, you can contact the Office of Student Life (110 Bray, 315-470-6658) and they will contact all your instructors for you. Supportive documentation may be required.
GRADING
Grades are assigned in all credit bearing courses to reflect how well students have met the student learning outcomes of the course. Details about the grading components:
- reviews (60 pts.) six (6) external reviews total | A review evaluates your work holistically taking into consideration your work ethic up to that point, the delivery of your team/individual presentation, the quality and depth of your work and deliverables.
- project briefs (20 pts) | six (6) project briefs total | A project brief is like homework that is to be completed in and outside of studio on your own time. You will be evaluated on your work ethic, contribution and attitude towards your teams goals, accuracy and completion of work as per the brief.
- participation (10 pts.) | The students attitude, work ethic and contribution to the course, self and classmates improvement and respect towards the faculty, jurors, others, studio space.
- student portfolio (10 pts.) | A comprehensive portfolio in the form of all final products for all studio project briefs is required (see examples from previous semesters) Each student shall provide safe storage and multiple back up methods for all data/work produced throughout the semester. On occasion, samples of your work are retained for accreditation purposes, if this happens to you, you will be given every opportunity to document (photograph or digitize) your work for the portfolio. To receive the full 10 points this portfolio shall be delivered by Tuesday, December 15, 2015 as an operable pdf. file to:
> 2 cd's in Prof. Fernández mailbox
> complete and linked to this website
* Reviews and briefs will be weighed differently, see brief for details on points out of your final grade
GRADING RUBRIC
Within each brief there will be multiple informal and formal reviews during which you will present your interim and your final products. These presentations are equivalent to quizzes/exams and will be evaluated as per the following rubric:
From 1-5 on each of the categories below (1=fails to meet expectations, 2=partly meets expectations, 3=meets expectations, 4= exceeds expectations, 5=exceptional)
- student has completed all of the required work on time as per your faculty's instructions
- the proposed design solution presented is creative and innovative
- function and viability - can the project be built
- student shows up on time and is professionally dressed
- student delivers a clear, comprehensive and effective verbal presentation
- student delivers a clear, comprehensive and effective graphic presentation
- student is open and receptive to feedback
STUDIO GRADE DESCRIPTIONS
Excellent Work: A, A- | 100-90
As a faculty we are enthusiastic about giving A’s for excellent student work; however, we intend these grades to be meaningful. Therefore, with the bar set high there may be few A’s in the class. Students who receive A’s in studio will have earned their grade by:
1. Producing design work that utilizes a strong conceptual foundation, clearly articulates forms derived from that concept, and articulates a cohesive spatial design.
2. Fully and exhaustively researching and developing design proposals, utilizing ideas not touched on directly in class. (For example, researching built or proposed works similar to the assigned problem for inspiration or technical approach; or pursuing readings outside of what has been assigned to broaden your understanding of the problem.)
3. Demonstrating the ability to achieve and excel in the development of studio work by positively responding to faculty criticism, as well as showing the ability to work independently (this means you do not require constant input, supervision and approval before progressing).
4. Fully utilizing the design process, creating iterative trace studies, overlays and alternatives, creating study models, and other means of fully exploring ideas prior to producing final drawings and models.
5. Demonstrating superior craft—beautifully made drawings and models with precise attention to details.
6. Actively participating/ proposing in a critical dialogue in both group and individual discussions about assignments. A leader who helps faculty foster an atmosphere of inquiry about studio problems.
7. Enthusiastic about the assignments and discussions, working to exceed the minimal expectations.
8. Making the most of each and every studio session (i.e. working the entire period, discussing relevant project-related issues with classmates, effectively using desk crits, participating in discussion, etc.)
9. Using both oral and written communication (on boards) to completely articulate the full range of ideas. Spelling and grammar are excellent.
Notable Work: B+, B | 89-80
A grade of B or higher is reserved for students who go beyond minimal competency and begin to demonstrate a willingness to work hard and consistently with some notable success. Working hard is both a time and effort commitment and success is measured by
1. Producing design work that utilizes a reasonable conceptual foundation, clearly articulates forms derived from that concept, and articulates a cohesive spatial design.
2. Demonstrating not only understanding but also achievement in directing the investigations and development of studio work.
3. Researching and developing design proposals, utilizing ideas not touched on directly in class. (For example, researching built or proposed works similar to the assigned problem for inspiration or technical approach; or pursuing readings outside of what has been assigned to broaden your understanding of the problem.)
4. Utilizing the design process to explore design ideas, as demonstrated by trace studies, overlays and alternatives, study models, etc., prior to producing final drawings and models.
5. Demonstrating strong competence in craft.
6. Often participating in group discussions
7. Demonstrating enthusiasm about the assignments and discussions.
8. Attending and working during each studio session.
9. Using both oral and written communication (on boards) to articulate ideas. Spelling and grammar are good.
Competent Work: B-, C+ | 83-78
A student who consistently meets all deadlines and project requirements as well as:
1. Producing design responses that are derived from an effective conceptual foundation, and are based on forms derived from that concept.
2. Showing a basic understanding of issues introduced in studio.
3. Demonstrating a willingness to think critically about studio design problems by asking good questions of faculty and peers. Student may have some difficulties but actively work to address gaps in their understanding.
4. Demonstrating only a core competence in craft.
5. Occasionally contributing to group discussions.
6. Occasionally enthusiastic about the assignments and discussions.
7. Attending and working during each studio session.
8. Meeting required work for each studio session.
9. Using both oral and written communication (on boards) to articulate ideas. Spelling and grammar are acceptable.
Satisfactory (Marginal) Work: C | 77-74
Student work that meets only a minimal level of competence. This is borderline work and should be considered a warning of the potential for problems in upper level studios. It is important to note that satisfactory work must surpass mere completion by exhibiting an acceptable level of competence.
1. All work is complete and turned in on time.
2. Work shows minimal understanding of issues introduced in the assignments.
3. Student has shown some minimal willingness to think critically about studio design problems, although often creating superficial or reflexive responses not related to a concept.
4. Conceptual foundation for work is weakly defined and articulated, with design responses utilizing forms, patterns, and objects that are applied in loosely arranged space(s).
5. Minimal utilization of the design process, showing little design exploration.
6. Craft is problematic, but ideas are readable.
7. Student is an active member of studio culture.
8. Student attends all studios, arriving on time and departing only at the end of the period.
9. Both oral and written communications (on boards) are minimally effective. Spelling and grammar are problematic.
Unsatisfactory Work: C-, D | 73-70 and 69-60
A student who does not demonstrate the minimal competence to advance in the program. Students receiving a C- or lower must petition to advance to the next studio. Student work that receives this grade has the following characteristics:
1. All deadlines are met, however projects are not complete (see policy on late work).
2. Exhibiting difficulty in demonstrating recognition and understanding of the issues presented in the studio problems.
3. Conceptual foundation for work is poorly defined and articulated, with design responses utilizing unrelated forms and patterns as well as randomly applied objects.
4. Poor utilization of the design process, showing no design exploration and solutions that “appear” on the due date.
5. Little or no willingness to think critically about the studio assignments.
6. Little or no evidence of student work maturing over course of semester.
7. Unacceptable level of craft where accuracy and precision are problematic.
8. Missing or leaving studio sessions early without notice.
9. Repeatedly coming to class late.
10. Being a distraction rather than an asset to the working environment of the studio.
11. Oral and written communications are unclear and poorly articulated. Spelling and grammar are abysmal.
Course Failure: F | 59 and less
1. Student work does not meet minimal academic standards for passing the course.
2. Completion and deadlines are not met.
3. No recognition or understanding of the issues and concepts presented in the studio problems.
4. No willingness to think critically about the studio assignments.
5. No evidence of student work maturing over course of semester.
6. Unacceptable level of craft where accuracy and precision are absent.
7. Missing or leaving studio sessions early without notice.
8. Repeatedly coming to class late.
9. Disciplinary problems.
STUDIO ETIQUETTE
1. Punctual attendance and the timely delivery and presentation of all assignment and projects is required and non-negotiable to realize the learning benefits of this course. If dire circumstances prevent you from attending studio, please notify your Graduate Assistant and/or professors immediately. To pass the course, students must complete all parts of the projects, and submit them at the date and time specified on their project statements—regardless of the degree of completion. Work submitted late will not be given full credit. Extensions without penalty may be given to students with written medical excuses, or to students who can document circumstances beyond their control that prevented them from completing the work. In any event, students must advise studio faculty of their problem at the earliest possible moment—definitely prior to the due date.
2. Refrain from any activity that distracts surrounding people are inconsiderate and disrespectful, including texting, emailing, browsing the web or using cellular phones while in class for non-class related purposes.
3. We encourage: student contribution to the overall progress of the group, interactive participation, solid teamwork and constructive criticism.
4. It is necessary that students have a professional and ethic behavior through the entire course. Lectures are a group activity, and so it requires social consideration and respect amongst members of the group, teachers and professors.
5. Interest, effort, diligence and a positive attitude towards the quality of your work
6. By this time you have all been here long enough to know how to treat each other, how to treat the facilities and to maintain a civil code. Be aware of your classmates feelings, do nothing to offend. If you are unsure of what this civil code is, please speak to your studio instructors.
TEXTBOOKS & MATERIALS:
Although there are no formal textbooks required, there will be required and recommended readings assigned that will either be provided digitally or will need to be downloaded or found (via library resources or internet) by the students.
Students are required to purchase or have access to a variety of traditional graphic communication media and tools such as:
- Trace paper
- Pens and pencils in a variety of sizes and colors (green, blue, black)
- Computers: Access to a computer with Photoshop, InDesign, Illustrator, Auto Cad, SketchUP or any other 3d program you know how to use or plan to quickly learn. If you do not own you may use the computer lab in Marshall Hall
- Software programs: Adobe Illustrator, Photoshop and InDesign CS5 or higher | Auto CAD 2014 or higher | SketchUp, Rhino or similar 3D software
- Any type of camera (including cell phone).
- Sketchbook/journal
- An incredibly positive attitude and a solid work ethic
STUDIO RECOMMENDED READINGS/RESOURCES:
The Smart Growth Manual by Andres Duany
Redeveloping Industrial Sites by Carol Berens
Urban design health and the therapeutic environment by Moughtin
Urban Design Reader by Carmona & Tisdell
Health & Community Design by Frank Engelke Schmid
Toward Sustainable Communities by Mark Roseland
Sustainable Communities by Hugh Barton
Sustainable Urbanism Urban Design with Nature by Doug Farr
Design with Nature by Ian McHarg
Walkable City by Jeff Speck
Phyto: Principles and Resources for Site Remediation and Landscape Design
by Niall Kirkwood and Kate Kennen
Manufactured Sites: Rethinking the Post-Industrial Landscape
by Niall Kirkwood
The Hidden Dimension by Edward T. Hall
The Death and Life of Great American Cities by Jane Jacobs
Resilience in Urban Ecology and Design: Linking Theory and Practice for Sustainable Cities
Julie Bargmann, “Just Ground: a social infrastructure for urban landscape regeneration,” in Resilience in Urban Ecology and Design: Linking Theory and Practice for Sustainable Cities, ed. Steward Pickett, (New York: Springer, 2013)
Groundwork: Between Landscape and Architecture
Diana Balmori and Joel Saunders, “Urban Outfitters Headquarters,” Groundwork: Between Landscape and Architecture. (New York: Monacelli, 2011), 148-151.
High Line: The Inside Story of New York City’s Park in the Sky
Joshua David and Robert Hammond, High Line: The Inside Story of New York City’s Park in the Sky, (New York: Farrar, Straus and Giroux, 2011), 56, 67, 74, and 170.
Growing Urban Habitats
William Morrish, Susanne Schindler and Katie Swenson, “GreeNOLA.” Growing Urban Habitats, (Richmond:Stout) 2009, 190-193.
Living Systems: Innovative Materials and Technologies for Landscape Architecture
Liat Margolis and Alexander Robinson, “Ground Reconstitution Strategy,” Living Systems: Innovative Materials and Technologies for Landscape Architecture, (Basel:Birkhäuser, 2007), 114-117.
Women in Green: Voices of Sustainable Design
Kira Gould & Lance Hosey, Women in Green: Voices of Sustainable Design, (Bainbridge Island: Ecotone), 2007.
Weathering and Durability in Landscape Architecture: Fundamentals, Practices, and Case Studies
Niall Kirkwood, Weathering and Durability in Landscape Architecture: Fundamentals, Practices, and Case Studies, (New York: Wiley), 2004.
Re:Crafted: Interpretations of Craft In Contemporary Architecture and Interiors
Marc Kristal, “Turtle Creek Waterworks.” Re:Crafted: Interpretations of Craft In Contemporary Architecture and Interiors, (New York: Monacelli, 2010), 132-139.
JOURNALS
Paisea
Jose Manuel Vidal, “Semi-Private Urban Spaces/Brooklyn Navy Yard Visitors Center,” Paisea, September, 2014.
Green Building & Design
Laura M. Browning, “Architect to Watch,” Green Building & Design, November-December, 2011.
Garden Design
Virginia Small, “Julie Bargmann: Regenerating Down and Out Landscapes,” Garden Design, July/August 2009, 74-75.
Topos
Julie Bargmann and David Hill, “Urban Outfitters Headquarters,” Topos, Special Issue: Materials, May 2009, 52-57.
Landscape Architecture
Elizabeth K. Meyer, “Sustaining Beauty: The Performance of Appearance,” Landscape Architecture October 2008, 92-131.
Construction + Demolition Recycling Magazine
Curt Harler, “Urban Outfitters Brownfields Case Study,” Construction + Demolition Recycling Magazine, February 2008, 48-54.
Green Source Magazine
Jenna McKnight, “The Landscape Healer,” Green Source Magazine, October 2007, 35-36.
Landscape Architecture
Susan Hines, “Julie Bargmann Unexpurgated,” Landscape Architecture, October 2007, 132-139.
Garden Design
“ASLA/Garden Design Residential Awards of Honor,” Garden Design, September 2007, 81.
METROPOLIS
Inga Saffron, “A Stitch in Time,” Metropolis, May 2007, 121-135.
The Next American City
Sarah Johnson, “Industrial Strength,” The Next American City, Spring 2007, 44-45.
Lotus
“Contemporary Landscapes: Reclaiming Terrain,” Lotus, Fall 2006, 22-31.
Architect’s Newspaper
Gunnar Hand, “The New Urbanism,” Architect’s Newspaper, June 2006, 8.
Landscape Architecture
Adam Arvidson, “Coming Clean,” Landscape Architecture, October 2005, 96-115.
HI International
“Bio What?” October 2005
Architecture Magazine
“Talking Trash With Julie Bargmann,” October 2004
METROPOLIS
Melissa Milgrom, “Industrial Strength,” Metropolis, May 2003, 108-111.
Architectural Record
James Russell, "Landscape Urbanism: Not a Contradiction,” Architectural Record, August 2001, 66-74.
Garden Design
Alan Reder, "Toxic Avenger,” Garden Design, August 2001, 18-19.
I.D.
Alexandra Lange, "Cleaning Up," The I.D. FORTY: Socially Conscious Design Issue, February 2001, 60-61.
Architecture
Cathy Ho, “Waste Not, Want Not," Architecture, November 2000, 79-81.
METROPOLIS
Paul Makovsky, “Emerging Voices: New Architecture Faces the Future,” Metropolis, April 2000, 74-75.
Landscape Journal
Brenda Brown, ed., “Testing the Waters,” Landscape Journal Special Issue: Eco-Revelatory Design, Spring 1998, 38-41.
Public Art Review
T. Allan Comp, “A Place of Regeneration,” Public Art Review Regarding Land Issue, Spring / Summer 1997, 14-18.
SOFTWARE KNOWLEDGE NECESSARY
Auto CAD, Adobe series, 3d software, weebly for website development
STUDENTS WITH LEARNING AND PHYSICAL DISABILITIES
SUNY-ESF works with the Office of Disability Services (ODS) at Syracuse University, who is responsible for coordinating disability-related accommodations. Students can contact ODS at 804 University Avenue- Room 309, 315-443-4498 to schedule an appointment and discuss their needs and the process for requesting accommodations. Students may also contact the ESF Office of Student Affairs, 110 Bray Hall, 315-470-6660 for assistance with the process. To learn more about ODS, visit http://disabilityservices.syr.edu. Authorized accommodation forms must be in the instructor's possession one week prior to any anticipated accommodation. Since accommodations may require early planning and generally are not provided retroactively, please contact ODS as soon as possible.
ACADEMIC DISHONESTY
Academic dishonesty is a breach of trust between a student, one’s fellow students, or the instructor(s). By registering for courses at ESF you acknowledge your awareness of the ESF Code of Student Conduct (http://www.esf.edu/students/handbook/StudentHB.05.pdf ), in particular academic dishonesty includes but is not limited to plagiarism and cheating, and other forms of academic misconduct. The Academic Integrity Handbook contains further information and guidance (http://www.esf.edu/students/integrity/). Infractions of the academic integrity code may lead to academic penalties as per the ESF Grading Policy (http://www.esf.edu/provost/policies/documents/GradingPolicy.11.12.2013.pdf).